Attorneys for Jacksonville woman look to introduce new evidence in her self-defense claim

Marissa Alexander stands outside the Duval County Courthouse with her lawyers Bruce Zimet (left) and Faith Gay (right) during a press conference on Jan. 10, 2013.

Attorneys for Marissa Alexander are asking for a Stand Your Ground hearing to argue that she fired a shot at her estranged husband in self defense.

It will be the second time Alexander, 33, seeks immunity from prosecution under the state’s Stand Your Ground law, which allows the use of deadly force instead of retreating if the person is afraid for his or her life. A previous claim in July, 2011 was rejected.

Alexander, 33, is out on bond while awaiting a new trial on charges of firing a gun at her estranged husband and his two children. She was previously convicted of three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and sentenced to 20 years in prison, but that conviction was thrown out on appeal.

The new Stand Your Ground motion, filed Friday by attorney Bruce Zimet, argues that there is critical new information that wasn’t heard in the original Stand Your Ground hearing. It also says the information presented at the original hearing “was at best grossly incomplete.”

New evidence profoundly undermines the testimony of Alexander’s estranged husband, Rico Gray, and his two children, Zimet said. All three testified in the original Stand Your Ground hearing.

One child completely recanted his testimony while another was revealed to have previously lied to police about a prior altercation involving his father and another woman, Zimet said.

The judge in the original hearing also didn’t have the chance to consider evidence of Gray’s history of abuse against other women, his intimidation of witnesses and his blaming of his victims, Zimet said.

Evidence will also be introduced at the second hearing showing that Alexander had good reason to believe that serious bodily harm or death at Gray’s hand was imminent if she hadn’t discharged her firearm.

“When the full evidentiary record is analyzed under the correct statute, Alexander’s right to immunity will be clear,” Zimet said in his motion. “Alexander therefore respectfully requests an evidentiary hearing to present to the court critical evidence never previously introduced, to be analyzed in the context of the complete factual record and under the correct legal framework.”

Officials with the State Attorney’s Office, who are prosecuting Alexander, did not respond to phone calls or e-mails Friday.

Alexander was originally convicted in 2012 and sentenced to 20 years in prison, but that sentence was overturned in 2013 when an appeals court ruled that Circuit Judge James Daniel made a mistake in shifting the burden to Alexander to prove she was acting in self-defense.

During jury instructions, Daniel said she must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was battered by her husband.

The case generated international attention after she lost in her original Stand Your Ground motion and was sentenced to 20 years in prison, with many saying the sentence was excessive.

Alexander has claimed she wasn’t trying to hit Gray or his two children from a previous relationship. She has said the incident, which happened days after she’d given birth, began when Gray accused her of infidelity and questioned whether the newborn child was his.

Alexander told him to leave and locked herself in the bathroom until he broke through the door, grabbed her by the neck and shoved her to the floor.

She ran into the garage but found she couldn’t leave because the garage door wouldn’t open, according to a police report.

She got a gun from the glove compartment of a car in the garage, went back into the house and when Gray saw her, she said he charged, saying he was going to kill her. Alexander fired the gun.

Alexander said it was a warning shot. Prosecutors say the bullet hit the wall, not the ceiling, and it could have killed Gray or his children.

Alexander cited the Stand Your Ground law to justify firing the shot. But that defense was rejected by Circuit Judge Elizabeth Senterfitt, who ruled that Alexander’s choice to go back into the house to face her husband was not consistent with someone who was in “genuine fear of his or her life.”

The new Stand Your Ground motion argues that Alexander was entitled to not be driven from her home under threat.

“Where a defendant is attacked in her own home, she is entitled to obtain a weapon — and use it — in self defense, and is not required to seek escape or flee from the home,” Zimet said.

Her movements between the house and garage do not alter that right or constitute a retreat from the altercation, he said.

Attorneys for Alexander are also challenging the state’s 10-20-life law and the State Attorney’s contention that a recent appeals court ruling would require Circuit Judge James Daniel to sentence Alexander to 60 years in prison if she’s convicted of the three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon she is now charged with.

A lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding due to its creation of an imminent and substantial detrimental effect on that proceeding.

(b) Statements of Third Parties.

A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to make such a statement. Counsel shall exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, employees, or other persons assisting in or associated with a case from making extrajudicial statements that are prohibited under this rule.

Extrajudicial -An extrajudicial statement is an out-of-court utterance, either written or oral. When offered into court as evidence, it is subject to the Hearsay rule and its exceptions.

Referring to actions outside the judicial (court) system, such as an extralegal confession, which, if brought in as evidence, may be recognized by the judge during a trial.